Article ID Journal Published Year Pages File Type
4281696 The American Journal of Surgery 2006 6 Pages PDF
Abstract

BackgroundCarotid artery stenting (CAS) has become an alternative modality to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for the treatment of carotid occlusive disease. We report a retrospective review of our institution’s experience with CAS versus CEA.MethodsPostprocedure surveillance duplex, recurrent symptoms, postprocedure strokes, progression of lesions, and rates of re-operation were analyzed in 46 patients who underwent CAS and 48 patients who underwent CEA. The mean length of follow-up evaluation was 13 months. All CAS procedures included neuroprotection devices.ResultsStatistically significant differences in progression to critical restenosis (2% vs 2%, P = 1.0), rate of subsequent symptoms or stroke (2% vs 10%, P = .1), or rate of re-interventions were not observed between CAS and CEA groups (2% vs 4%, P = .98). Total mortality (0% vs 2%, P = .33), and the occurrence of major adverse events (2% vs 10%, P = .18) also were not significantly different in the CAS compared with the CEA patients. The average rate of increase in internal carotid velocity at 6 to 12 months (−1% vs 1.1%, P = NS) and 12 to 24 months (−5% vs −6.5%, P = NS) also were equivalent.ConclusionsOur observed results indicate that CAS may be performed with comparable clinical outcomes and durability of repair comparable with CEA.

Related Topics
Health Sciences Medicine and Dentistry Surgery
Authors
, , , , ,